Corporate Social Responsibility Startegy for Autoparts Industrial Sectors

Main Article Content

สุรพงษ์ วัชรจิตติ์
อมรา รัตตากร
รณฤต น้อยพันธุ์

Abstract

          The objectives of this study were to 1) study the current status of the auto parts industry, 2) study the compliance with corporate social responsibility (CSR) standards, 3) study the CSR activities and
4) develop CSR strategies. This research was a combination of quantitative and qualitative research. Population were the executives who were responsible for corporate social responsibility of 16 listed companies in auto parts industry in the stock exchange of Thailand. The tools were In-depth interviews and questionnaires. Qualitative data analysis was done by content analysis while quantitative data analysis was analyzed by descriptive statistics i.e. mean and standard deviation. The research result was as follows: (1) the present situation of the auto parts industrial sector is very good. 1.1) as pertaining to general condition was very good the structure, product partner, and shareholders and complied in relation to regulations of the Stock Exchange of Thailand and the product standard and partners agreement. 1.2) The financial performance was at a high level e.g. the return on assets (ROE) averaged 10.56%, the return on equity (ROA) averaged 12.19% and the net profit margin (NP) averaged 7.76%. 1.3) CSR Policy covered and the impacts were conditioned both internal and external stakeholders. (2) As per Compliance practices toward CSR standards was at a high level in terms of respect for rights and fair labor practices ( gif.latex?\bar{x}= 3.36, S.D. = 1.525) and environmental protection ( gif.latex?\bar{x}= 3.53, S.D. = 0.85), while the remainder was moderate. (3) CSR Activities indicated a high level, including employees and workers relation, and community and society relation. (4) The CSR Strategies: 4.1) the internal CSR strategies are 3 prime strategies including Legitimate Strategy (Corporate Governance Strategy and Innovative Product Development Strategy), Business Ethics Strategy and Corporate Citizenship strategies (Economic responsibility, Legal responsibility and Ethical responsibility and Social responsibility). 4.2) The external CSR strategies are two prime strategies including Public Responsibility Strategy (Volunteerism and Dialogue Strategy and Strategies for Providing Communities Opportunities Strategy) and Stakeholder strategies (shareholders and employees, customers and consumers, partners and competitors, the community and society, and environment).
           It can be concluded that the current situation of the auto parts industry is very good. The financial performance is high level. The CSR policies have a comprehensive policy. There are two compliance practices toward CSR standards were at high level In terms of respect for rights and fair labor practices and environmental protection. The CSR activities are carried out a high level on employee and labor activities, and community and social activities. Corporate Social Responsibility Strategy: There are 3 internal CSR Strategies (Legitimate strategy, Business Ethics and Corporate Citizenship Strategy) and 2 external CSR Strategy public responsibilities Strategy and Stakeholder Strategy.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
วัชรจิตติ์ส., รัตตากรอ., & น้อยพันธุ์ร. (2019). Corporate Social Responsibility Startegy for Autoparts Industrial Sectors. JOURNAL OF SOUTHERN TECHNOLOGY, 12(1), 115-128. Retrieved from https://so04.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/journal_sct/article/view/108507
Section
Research Manuscript

References

Adams, C., & Zutshi, A. (2004). Corporate social responsibility: Why business should act responsibly and be
accountable. Australian Accounting Review, 14(3), 31–39.
Aerts, W., & Cormier, D. (2009). Media legitimacy and corporate environmental communication. Accounting,
Organizations and Society, 34(1), 1–27.
Aras, G., & Crowther, D. (2009). Corporate Social Responsibility: a Broader View of Corporate Governance; Gower
Handbook of Corporate Governance and Corporate Social Responsibility; Alders hot; Gower (Forthcoming)
Caroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business and Society, 38 (3),
268-295.
Fontaine, C., Haarman, A., & Schmid, S. (2006). The Stakeholder theory. Retrieved December 22, 2012, from
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/606a/828294dafd62aeda92a77bd7e5d0a39af56f.pdf
Freeman, R. E. (2006). A stakeholder theory of modern corporations. Ethical Theory and Business, 12(3), 144.
Freeman, R. E., & Phillips, A. R. (2002). Stakeholder theory: A libertarian defense. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12 (3),
331–349.
Gibson, K., & O’Donovan, G. (2007). Corporate governance and environmental reporting: An Australian study.
Corporate Governance. An International Review, Oxford, 15(5), 944–956.
Gautam, R., & Singh, A. (2010). Corporate Social Responsibility Practices in India: A Study of Top 500 Companies.
Global Business and Management Research: An International Journal, 2(1), 11-56.
Gegarra-Navarro, J.-G., Wensley, A.K.P., Reverte, C., & Gomez-Melero, E. (2016). Linking social and economic
responsibilities with financial performance: The role of innovation. European Management Journal, 34,
530-539.
Hohnen, D. (2007). Corporate Social Responsibility An Implementation Guide for Business. International Institute for
Sustainable Development, Canada
Jamali, D. (2008). A stakeholder approach to corporate social responsibility: A fresh perspective into theory and
practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(1), 213-231.
Juan, G. C., Carmelo, R., Eduardo, G., & Anthony, W. (2016). Linking social and economic responsibilities with financial
performance: The role of innovation. European Management Journal, 34, 530-539.
Katherina, G. (2010) The Influence of Shareholders on Corporate Social Responsibility, Business Partnering with the
University of St. Thomas.
Kamatra, N., & Kartikaningdyah, E. (2015). Effect Corporate Social Responsibility on Financial Performance.
International Journal of Economics and Financial, Issues ISSN: 2146-4138 Issues 2015, 5 (Special Issue) 157-164.
Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2004) Corporate Social Responsibility: Doing the Most Good for Your Company and Your Cause,
John Wiley and Sons Ltd., New York.
Kasikorn Research Center. (2017). Thai SMEs Moves Forward to Automotive trends. March 2, 2017. [in Thai]
Lyon, P. L., & Maxwell, W. J. (2011). Green wash: corporate environmental disclosure under threat of audit. Journal of
Economics & Management Strategy, 20(1), 3–41.
Melé, D. (2008). Corporate Social Responsibility Theories. The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility.
Oxford University Press. Retrieved December 20, 2012, from https://dl.bsu.by/pluginfile.
php/66247/mod_resource/content/1/Corporate_SocialResponsibility_Theories.pdf
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2011). OECD Guidelines for Multinational
Enterprises 2011 Edition, OECD Publishing. [in Thai]
Panthaveesak, N., & Mukdahanakorn, P. (2017). To up Grade Thai auto parts to the world class Automotive Industry.
SCB Economic Intelligence Center (EIC). August 2, 2017. [in Thai]
Papasolomou-Doukakis, I., Krambia-Kapardis, M., & Katsioloudes, M. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: The way
forward? Maybe not. European Business Review, 17(3), 263–279.
Post, E. J., Preston, E. L., & Sachs, S. (2002). Redefining the Corporation Stakeholder Management and Organizational
Wealth, Redwood City, Stanford University Press.
Preston, L.E., & James, E. P. (1975). Private Management and Public Policy: The Principle of Public Responsibility.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Rexhepia, G., Kurtishib, S., & Bexhetic, G. (2013). Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Innovation-The drivers of
business growth? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 75, 532 – 541
Roza, L. (2016). Employee Engagement in Corporate Social Responsibility. Erasmus Research Institute of
Management–ERIM, Erasmus University, ISSN 1568-1726.
Securities and Exchange Commission: (n.d.). NYSE Rulemaking, https://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro/nyse/nysearchive/nysearchive2003.shtml. [in Thai]
Spiller, R. (2000). Ethical business and investment: A model for business and society. Journal of Business Ethics, 27(1),
149–160.
Sustainable Business Development Institute. (2013). CSR for Corporate. Sustainability, Bangkok. Stock exchange of
Thailand. [in Thai]
Thai Industrial Standards Institute, The Ministry of Industry. (2011). The Guidance on CSR of Industrial Product
Standards and ISO 260000, The Royal Thai Government Gazette, Feb.14, 2011, Volume 128. [in Thai]
The Stock Exchange of Thailand. (2008). CSR Guidelines. Bangkok: Icon Printing. [in Thai]
Walden, W. D., & Schwartz, B.N. (1997). Environmental disclosures and public policy pressure. Journal of Accounting
and Public Policy, 16, 125-154.
Weiss, W. J. (2008). Business Ethics: A Stakeholder and Issues Management Approach. South-Western Cengage
Learning, Mason, USA.
Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16, 691-718.